node-feature-discovery

node-feature-discovery copied to clipboard

Extend the format of feature matcher terms (the elements specified under under matchFeatures) with new matchName field. This field contains an expression that is evaluated against the names of features (i.e. keys in the set of feature elements) instead of their values (which is accomplished with the matchExpressions field).

The matchName field is useful e.g. in template rules for creating per-feature-element labels based on feature names (instead of values) and in "normal" (non-template) rules for checking if (at least) one of certain feature element names are present.

If both matchExpressions and matchName for certain feature matcher term is specified, they both must match in order to get an overall match. Also, in this case the list of matched features (used in templating) is the union of the results from matchExpressions and matchName.

An example of creating an "avx512" label if any AVX512* CPUID feature is present:

  - name: "avx wildcard rule"
    labels:
        avx512: "true"
    matchFeatures:
      - feature: cpu.cpuid
        matchName: {op: InRegexp, value: ["^AVX512"]}

An example of a template rule creating a dynamic set of labels based on the existence of certain kconfig options.

  - name: "kconfig template rule"
    labelsTemplate: |
      {{ range .kernel.config }}kconfig-{{ .Name }}={{ .Value }}
      {{ end }}
    matchFeatures:
      - feature: kernel.config
        matchName: {op: In, value: ["SWAP", "X86", "ARM"]}

Mar 17 '22 16:03 marquiz

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: marquiz

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Mar 17 '22 16:03 k8s-ci-robot

Still a POC/RFC, missing e.g. documentation /hold

Mar 17 '22 16:03 marquiz

still a hold?

Aug 23 '22 14:08 ArangoGutierrez

still a hold?

Heh, I'm still a bit unsure do we need this, if anybody wants this 😄 OTOH, it would make it possible to turn all "built-in" labels into NodeFeatureRules 🧐

In addition, docs are still missing.

Aug 24 '22 04:08 marquiz

/retest

Aug 30 '22 19:08 marquiz

Rebased

Oct 07 '22 12:10 marquiz

✅ Deploy Preview for kubernetes-sigs-nfd ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	49886ed6358570478a39856516c5534742da431f
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/kubernetes-sigs-nfd/deploys/657c1d4ea48f910008af4ab5
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-788--kubernetes-sigs-nfd.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

Oct 07 '22 12:10 netlify[bot]

@marquiz: PR needs rebase.

Oct 24 '22 18:10 k8s-ci-robot

Rebased. Still RFC/POC

Dec 20 '22 09:12 marquiz

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all PRs.

This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the PR is closed

You can:

• Mark this PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
• Close this PR with /close
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

Mar 20 '23 10:03 k8s-triage-robot

Still relevant /remove-lifecycle stale

Mar 20 '23 12:03 marquiz

Still POC @marquiz ?

Oct 30 '23 10:10 ArangoGutierrez

Still POC @marquiz ?

Yeah, I'm still a bit unsure about the naming, for example. I have one potential use case in mind but will keep this in hold for now...

Oct 30 '23 12:10 marquiz

I added a patch that adds sample NodeFeatureRules that correspond the built-in labels created by nfd-worker (with its default configuration).

These samples demonstrate how to utilize NodeFeatureRules. Maybe we could replace the whole nfd-worker side label generation with NodeFeatureRules at some point in the future...

ping @ArangoGutierrez

Nov 03 '23 08:11 marquiz

Update:

• rebased
• fixed a bug where the matchNames never failed
• added e2e tests

I think this would be ready for review, no reason to keep it hanging open forever. At least should not have any effect (cause problems) if not used 😉 /unhold

Dec 12 '23 16:12 marquiz

/assign @ArangoGutierrez

Dec 12 '23 16:12 marquiz

Ach, docs is missing 🙈 (plus unit tests fail) /hold

Dec 12 '23 16:12 marquiz

Rebased. Added documentation. /unhold

Dec 12 '23 17:12 marquiz

/retest

Dec 14 '23 17:12 ArangoGutierrez

/needs-rebase

Dec 14 '23 17:12 ArangoGutierrez

LGTM label has been added.

Dec 15 '23 11:12 k8s-ci-robot

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ArangoGutierrez, marquiz

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Dec 15 '23 11:12 k8s-ci-robot

/hold

Dec 15 '23 11:12 marquiz

Codecov Report

Merging #788 (49886ed) into master (443ff80) will decrease coverage by 0.07%. The diff coverage is 34.25%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #788      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   31.39%   31.33%   -0.07%     
==========================================
  Files          59       59              
  Lines        7555     7647      +92     
==========================================
+ Hits         2372     2396      +24     
- Misses       4939     5001      +62     
- Partials      244      250       +6     

Dec 15 '23 11:12 codecov[bot]

Too slow 😿

Dec 15 '23 11:12 marquiz

OK, see #1504

Dec 15 '23 11:12 marquiz